illinois. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question here about the fiscal cliff -- and what to do with it. with social security and medicare. i was wondering why a republicans to not pay into that? senators and congressmen. host: our caller bringing up one of the many issues that we will be addressing as we watch the lame duck session and the fiscal cliff. jason dick, thank you for coming in. roll call house editor. that is it for "washington journal." nancy pelosi is giving a press conference in a few moments on c-span 2. we will now join the house which is in session. day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore:

pursuant to the order of the house of january 17, 2012, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate . the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11: 50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, for five minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, an estimated 50,000 people die every year as a result of seize years. some of -- seizures. some of these victims are like danny stanton. chicago's mike and mary stanton founded the danny foundation after their 4-year-old son, danny, died from a seizure while he was sleeping.

it is dedicated to preventing deaths caused by seizures and raising epilepsy awareness among the public and medical community. that's no small task, but one brave 7-year-old is taking a courageous step to help raise awareness of epilepsy's dangers. nick kerley never met danny but nick's cousin suffers from seizures. i felt the need to do something bigger. an enthusiastic hockey player he combined his love for the sport and passion for charity to create 100 miles for danny. the 7-year-old athlete visited 20 different hockey rinks in chicago and skated five miles or 50 laps at each rink. his goal was been to raise money and awareness for epilepsy as well as the danny dibb foundation. i had the pleasure to skate with nick on two different

occasions. not only is he a good skater but raising awareness for epilepsy is extraordinary. he has a power example for all of us, one that i will not soon forget. on danny's first day of preschool he told his teacher, i just want to learn. like danny, the foundation aims to educate the general public and the medical community about this misunderstood disease. i admire the efforts of the danny foundation and heroes like nick kerley who truly enjoys life just like danny did. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones, for five minutes. mr. jones: mr. speaker, thank you very much. while we were home for the district work period in october, 18 american troops died in afghanistan. in my home county in pitt, north carolina, army specialist joshua nelson was killed by the very after gains he was set to

train. he's one of the 60 killed by these insider attacks. my advisor, a former united states marine corps commandant recently said to me, and i am most convinced than ever that we need to get out of afghanistan. when our friends turn out to be our enemy, it's time to pull the plug. it is such a tragedy when american service members are sent to afghanistan to train police and mifrlt and end up being killed -- military and end up being killed by their own trainees. mr. speaker, the whole war in afghanistan is a tragedy. on october 7, there was a national article titled "a mother mourns, a grim milestone," referring to the 2,000 american casualties from the war in afghanistan. lisa freeman who was interviewed in the article lost her son, captain matthew freeman, in 2009 in afghanistan. and ms. freeman said, and i quote, i just sat here reliving the pain and wondering, where

is america's outrage? where's america's concern that we're still at war? my question is, mr. speaker, why is the house of representatives still supporting a war that costs $10 billion a month? this money is borrowed primarily from the chinese. all we hear about is this financial cliff, this crisis that's facing america. my question is after 11 years, where's the outrage from congress for our men and women in uniform dying in afghanistan? 2014 is the date that the president has said we will start bringing the troops out. that is 25 more months. why do we have to wait until the end of 2014 to start bringing our troops home? how many more have to die at the hands of the very afghans they're training? october 14 "new york times" editorial titled "time to pack up," has a subtitle that says it best -- "it should not take

two more years for the united states to leave afghanistan." mr. speaker, i have a petition on my website, the website is jones.house..gov. i'm asking people around this country to please sign this petition with the name and state, nothing else, who agree with us and both sides, but we need more members, that in 2013 is the time to start bringing our troops home, not waiting until 2014. and mr. speaker, beside me, again, i bring posters to the floor to show the members of the house that we're still at war. the poster beside me, mr. speaker, right beside me now is an honor guard bringing a flag-draped transfer case off the plane. again, i join my friends and ask the members of congress to start debating the policy and let's start bringing our troops home in 2013 and not wait until december of 2014.

as a former commandant said, when our friends start killing us, then it's time to pull the plug. i close by asking god to please place our men and women in uniform, to bless the families of our men and women in uniform. i ask god to hold the families who have given a child dying for freedom in afghanistan and iraq. god, bless the house and senate that we will do what is right in the eyes of your people. god, please, give strength, wisdom and colonel for president obama that he will do what is right in your eyes for your people. i close by asking, god, please, god, please, god, please, continue to bless america, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from puerto rico, mr. pierluisi. mr. pierluisi: mr. speaker, puerto rico recently held -- i want to convey to the american public, describe their

significance and outline the next steps i will take. as background, puerto rico has been a u.s. territory since 1898. the island is home to 3.7 million american citizens who cannot vote for president, are not represented in the senate, and elect a nonvoting member to the house. federal law is supreme in puerto rico but its residents are treated unequally under many federal programs. voters were first asked whether they want puerto rico to remain a territory. over 1.7 million people answered. which is about 75% of registered voters on the island. 54% said they did not want the current status to continue while 46% said they did. voters were then asked to express their preference among the three viable alternatives to the current status. statehood, free association and independence.

over 1.3 million people chose an option. 61% voted for statehood. 33% voted for free association. and 5.5% voted for independence. in addition, 472,000 voters did not provide an answer. this marked the first time voters were directly asked whether they want puerto rico to remain a territory. one of the two main political parties in puerto rico urged a yes vote. nevertheless, the no vote won by eight points. those voting no included statehood supporters as well as advocates of independence and free association. these three groups are united in their opposition to the current status which is colonial in nature. it deprives puerto ricans of the right to choose the leaders who make their national laws and to equal treatment under

those laws. not one of my stateside colleagues in congress would accept this status for their constituents, so they should respect that my constituents no longer accept it either. the rejection of territory status changes the terms of this debate. after this vote, the question is not whether but when puerto rico will cease to be a territory and will have a fully democratic status. defenders of the status quo may obstruct change in the short term, but in a democracy where the -- but in a democracy voters will reprail. we asked which would replace the current status. of the 1.3 million people who voted for one of the three options, a supermajority chose statehood. of critical importance, the 810,000 votes for statehood on the second question exceeded

the 803,000 votes for the current status on the first question. for the first time, there are more people in puerto rico who want to become a state than who want to continue as a territory. this fact further undermines the democratic legitimacy of the current status. some wish to downplay the results of the pleb side by citing the voters who left the second question blank but this argument does not withstand scrutiny. in our democracy outcomes are determined by ballots properly cast. power rests with the citizen who votes, not the one who stays home or refuses to choice from among the options provided. some voters may have left the second question blank simply because they prefer the current status to its alternatives. those voters were able to vote for the current status in the first question, so their viewpoint was reflected in the results. others may have declined to

answer because they were led to believe there was another option that should have been on the ballot. a proposal called enhanced commonwealth. but each of the last four presidential administrations has rejected this proposal as have all key congressional leaders. a blank vote to protect the exclusion of a status proposal is entitled to no wait. as puerto rico's representative in the u.s. congress, i will work with my allies to make sure that the precedent and congress take appropriate action in light of these results. the people of puerto rico have spoken, and i intend to make certain that their voice is heard loud and clear. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california, ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, since the house last convened in late

september, about 30 more americans have given their lives in the war in afghanistan. the total number of fatalities has now passed 2,000, and as of october 7, we've been at war in afghanistan for a staggering 11 years. that's more than 2,000 families that will have an empty chair this thanksgiving, more than 2,000 families with a void that can't possibly be filled. husbands and wives who will have to go on without their life partner, children missing a parent, parents who are suffering the terrible grief of losing a child. the human cost has become too steep for our nation to bear. we can't ask for our troops and their families to endure any more sacrifice for military occupation. now more than a decade old which has not accomplished its goals and is undermining our national security as well.

and of course the fiscal burden is one that rests on the shoulders of every single tax -paying american, the afghanistan price tag will be high even for a successful, well-executed policy that was actually making american stronger. but to waste the people's money to the tune of $10 billion a month on this failure is a national scandal. to every one of my colleagues who have spoken on this floor about excessive government spending, it's time to look at the cost of foreign wars before we start cutting domestic programs that our very own people need and they need them to survive. it's just not progressives like me who believe we need a change in policy, mr. speaker. there is a clear consensus among the american people. they agree that this military occupation is bad for america,

bad for afghanistan and bad for the cause of peace and stability around the world. i think it was pretty telling that during the recent campaign even the republican candidate for president ended up supporting a withdrawal of troops by 2014, but in my opinion that's not nearly soon enough. . now that the presidential campaign is over, we must accelerate the timetable and end this war as soon as it is possible and safe. every remaining day we have troops on the ground is another day that gives strength to the very, treatmentists we are trying to defeat. the time has come to invest in afghanistan the right way, with humanitarian and civilian support, rather than military force. it's time for a smart security approach that puts development and diplomacy first, not just in

afghanistan, but throughout the developing world and in other nations where terrorism poses a threat. it's not only the right thing to do, mr. speaker, it's the most cost-effective way as well. it's pennies on the dollar to invest in humanitarian support for nations rather than military involvement. on sunday, many of us took part in veterans day parades back in our home district. in doing see we expressed and heard the expressions that our nation is so grateful for the service of these men and women. those who left their families in the communities to serve their country. i bow to no one in my respect for our veterans and those currently deployed overseas, but i believe the best way for us to support them right now and the best way to honor american values is to end the war in

afghanistan and bring our troops home. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess to the hour of 12:00

>> hope joining us this morning to talk about the lame duck congress and the so-called fiscal cliff is nancy who is a budget and tax correspondent. thanks for being here this morning. and then there's this mandated or across the board spending cuts that the budget control act put in place and those are the sequester and those would hit federal government spending across a bunch of different things like biomedical

research, education. and defense would be hit. hope you've been reporting on the fiscal cliff for a long time. the front page of "usa today" says we're facing a real cliffhanger. take us through what the fiscal cliff is. mr. gingrey: sure. so it's all -- guest: sure. so it's all these different things that consumers face. the one thing great about that "usa today" story is how it affects consumers. there's about 90% of all americans could face potential increases in their tax bills and that can be everything from the payroll tax holiday expiring and seeing those paychecks go up to, you know, senior individual income tax rate go up at the end of the year. so these are, you know, a lot of different things that affect people's pocketbooks. it's a big deal. and particularly it's for something to happen right after the election. host: and your reporting says that 90% of americans could essentially face a tax

increase. guest: right. it's a huge amount of people. and it would affect a lot of different people a lot of different ways. obviously the people in the upper income brackets would face the largest amount of tax increases because they pay the greater share of federal income taxes. you know, everyone would see their payroll tax go up. they would see their individual income tax, taxes on investment income are at stake. and then for corporations and businesses they're very concerned because there's a lot of business tax breaks that affect the way that they do business, the way they think about spending money and those are things at stake as well. host: how much has to get tackled before this congress adjourns for the new year? we'll see a new congress come in, the 113th congress come in january, but what they have to tackle before we hit the new year? guest: well, i mean, it depends. that's a great question. everyone wants to know. one thing that they have to really tackle is the alternative minimum tax, so that's a tax that was created, you know, several years ago in

the late 1960's and it was meant as a tax on wealthy people. every year they have to do this patch to kind of fix it because over time they never really done a full-scale overhaul of it. and what happens every year if you don't do that patch it ends up hitting middle-income families. and no politics, republican or democrat, wants to be responsible for having suddenly millions of people, middle-class people hit by that tax. so that's one thing that has to happen. the business community would love for their tax breaks to go forth and get extended. but i think the alternative minimum tax is one of the few things that absolutely has to get done and some of the other things like the individual income tax rates, there's a question about whether or not those can be retroactively dealt with. if it goes past the new year. but i don't think most politicians necessarily want to put it off indefinitely. they want some sort of small

dial put together at the end of the year because they know going into 2013 what they're going to be tackling. host we: -- host: we hear the phrase kicking it down the road. is that a realistic possibility? guest: i think that's the most likely scenario at this point. very few politicians want to do what they call going over the cliff which means -- so what i think there will be a spending short-term deal. we won't let these mandates take effect. we are going to extend some of the tax rates and then they're going to come up with some sort of framework that says this is how we're going to deal with this in 2013. host: well, nancy cook is a budget and tax correspondent for "national journal." let's go to the phones and hear from roy. where are you calling us from? caller: i'm calling from kentucky, madisonville.

host: welcome to the program. what do you have to share with us? caller: during this administration there are a couple of factory jobs that shut down and there are a couple people i work with at a restaurant, five of them have been laid off because of taxes. i don't know how taxes will be for individuals that work out in this country is going to shut more jobs down or is it going to create more jobs? you know, the wealthy is going to get taxed but what about other people, the individual that works every day? and i just think that if we are going to keep -- keep getting -- >> we are going to break away from this journal journal piece now. a quick reminder, you can watch this or any journal journal segment anytime at c-span.org. we're going live to the u.s. capitol where senators are coming out to talk about their congressional leadership elections.

this is live coverage on c-span. >> our incoming freshmen are anxious to do a lot of good things. they've said that and that's what they will do. the american people agreed on our balanced approach so this approach we're going to take to the remainder of this congress and into the new one which will begin very, very soon. questions? >> senator reid, now being your fourth term as majority leader, do you have any thoughts on surpassing l.b.j. and others? >> i'm just going to continue doing my job. i don't really -- i have not looked at the arithmetic of all

that stuff. >> senator reid, how would you like to move on [inaudible] >> well, we are -- everyone should understand we're going to move to change what the republicans have done to make the senate an institution that has no bearing on when lyndon johnson was president. when george mitchell was president or even when bill frist was leader. they have made this an almost impossible task to get this done. the motion to proceed, which they've abused -- do you realize we have the farm bill, the postal bill and many other things that we need to go to conference on like also the tax bill we passed over here? we can't go to conference. why? because it takes three filibusters. we have to overcome three filibusters to go to conference. i think that's something we

should change. so the rules are going -- we're going to make an attempt to change the rules and we're working -- we are working to make sure we have the votes to do that. >> the senator of massachusetts lamented banishing [inaudible] >> i'm glad to have the chance to respond to that. i wanted to do that. i saw during the campaign his plea for bipartisanship. that is a big joke. it's a traffic vessey -- travesty. he was one of the most partisan people that's ever served here. he could have saved citizens united. he could have been the 60th vote on that and many other things. i don't need a lecture from him on bipartisanship. he should go look in the mirror . >> [inaudible]

>> should never chew gum. get rid of it. i was going to tell you earlier but didn't have a chance. john kerry is my friend. i work so hard for him when he was running for president. i did everything i could to help him. and he came very, very close. there's been no better legislator that i served with. he's been wait out front on issues dealing with climate change, infrastructure, bank development and many other things. so i don't know any ks that the president or anyone in the white house has had with him and any conversation i've had with john kerry, he does not bring up his being secretary of anything. but i'll do everything to help him if he's chosen. and we feel very comfortable if

in fact something does happen, we feel comfortable in massachusetts. i think that i've already told you how i feel about scott brown. >> what do you think are his priorities should be coming out of today's press conference? >> the president's priorities are what he outlined in his campaign. protect the middle class and small business. we are one vote away from that being accomplished. all we have to do is have the house of representatives bring up our bill. we brought up their bill. it was roundly defeated. so they should do this to help the american people. on all the other issues that the president has laid out a program on, job creation, we need to do that, so the president doesn't need any -- doesn't need any information

from me. he knows what he's going to do. and he's pointed in the right direction. last question. >> [inaudible] >> most of you couldn't hear the question. but she said, what do i expect from the -- we'll be at the white house on friday and what about entitlement cuts? i've made it very clear. i've told anyone that will listen, including everyone in the white house, including the president, that i am not going to be part of having social security as part of these talks relating to this deficit. social security, i'm happy we have some independent commission like the

gregg-conrad economic -- commission dealing with social security. that's one of the myths that the republicans have tried to create. social security is sound for the next many years. we want to make sure in the outer years people are protected also, but it's not going to be part of the budget talks as far as i'm concerned. and as you know we strengthened medicare with our health care bill. we prolonged the life of it for 1 years. we saved hundreds of billions of dollars. all that saving went to recipients. so we're not going to be associating things here. but i give you my personal feelings about where we need to go. take care of the middle class and have the richest of the rich contribute a little bit to helping our economy, and the majority of the people who are fortunate and made a lot of money, they're willing to do this. democrats, independents and republican support the

direction of the president regarding this fiscal cliff issue. thanks, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> you just heard senate democrats speak about elections. the republicans will talk about their own election. main senator-elected angus king saying he'd caucus with the democrats. here's what he had to say.

-- maine senator-elect angus king saying he'd caucus with the democrats. here's what he had to say. >> good morning. all set. today i'm announcing my decision as to which party, if any, i'll associate myself in my work here in the u.s. senate. before doing so, however, i'd like to outline my thinking on this issue and set out the principles that have guided my decision. in answering this, who will you caucus with question, repeatedly during the campaign -- and i emphasize the word repeatedly -- i established two basic criteria that i wanted to maintain my independence as

long and as thoroughly as possible while at the same time being effective in my representation of maine. the first option i considered was whether i could literally go at it alone. and not align myself with either party and operate entirely outside of the current partisan structure of the senate. although tempting in many ways, it's become apparent from extensive research into the senate rules and precedence as well as discussions with those familiar with the operations of the senate that this simply wouldn't be practical. and in fact would severely compromise my ability to be effective on behalf of maine. the principle disadvantage at this go at it alone approach is that i would be largely excluded from the committee process, which is where most of the work of any legislative body takes place. occasionally, my vote would

probably prove crucial and be eagerly sought by both sides, but in the long run i would be relegated to the sidelines as the day-to-day work of the senate was done by others. the second question then, if i'm going to caucus or associate myself with a caucus is which side to choose. and the outcome of last week's elections in some ways makes this decision relatively easy. in the situation where one party has a clear majority and effectiveness is an important criteria, affiliating with the majority makes the most sense. the majority has more committee slots to fill, has more control over what bills get considered and more control over the senate schedule. but the question remains, what does caucusing means, and this is a question i raised continuously in the campaign, and how does this decision

affect my intention to remain as independent as possible? in order to answer this, i had substantial conversations with two independent senators currently serving in the senate both of whom are affiliated with the democratic caucus. joe lieberman of connecticut and bernie sanders of vermont. both confirmed that the democratic caucus generally and its leadership in particular had consistently allowed them to maintain their independent positions and had never forced positions upon them in the name of party loyalty. secondly, i had lengthy discussions with the democratic leader, harry reid of nevada, as well as former majority leader and my good friend, george mitchell of maine, on this very question. i came away from these conversations reassured that my independence would be respected and that no party line commitment would be required or

expected. and so i've decided to affiliate myself with the democratic caucus, because doing so will allow me to take independent positions on issues as they arise and at the same time will allow me to be an effective representative of the people of maine. one final word. by associating myself with one side, i am not in automatic opposition to the other. i'd like to repeat that. by associating myself with one side, i am not in automatic opposition to the other. in the situation of a republican house, a democratic senate but with substantial powers residing in the minority and a democratic president, no one party can control the outcome of our collective deliberations. as bill clinton might say, it's just arithmetic. in fact, this situation of a

divided government has only two possible outcomes -- action based upon good faith compromise or no action resulting from political dead lock, and in my position, the latter, is not acceptable to the people of maine and to the people of the united states. we must find a way to act, because many of the problems before us, the debt and deficit is probably the best example, have a time fuse. the longer we avoid acting, the worse they get. in this case, no decision is itself a decision, and it is almost undoubtedly the wrong decision. the challenges before us are too great and the stakes are too high to allow partisan differents to keep us from finding common ground even on

the most difficult issues, and i hope that in a small way, in a small way i may be able to act as a brim between the parties, an on -- bridge between the parties, an honest broker to help nudge us toward solutions. i talked to more than a dozen senators of both parties in the past three days and have been impressed by their seriousness of purpose and good faith desire to serve the country. i am truly humbled and honored to be among them and look forward to working with each of them in the months and years to come as we struggle to fulfill the fundamental promise of the constitution, to form a more perfect union. thank you very much, and i'd be glad to take a few questions. >> senator, you said that it makes more sense to affiliate with the majority. if the republicans were back in the majority, would you

consider caucusing with them? >> well, there would be two conversations. it would be a question of the majority and the ability to maintain my independence. >> the way the filibuster works in the senate and the cloture rule, how do you see yourself maybe voting on some of these? >> well, i represent a small state, and the filibuster and the rules of the senate in many ways are designed to protect the interests of small states, so i'm not one who thinks they should be abolished altogether. however, i think its use in recent years has been excessive, and i hope to talk with other senators who are more expert in this matter to find a slougs that would limit its -- solution that would limit its use as a -- as a tactic of delay and prohibiting

action but at the same time protect the interests of the states. so somewhere between no filibuster at all and the current situation, i think there's got to be some middle ground. in fact, i'm going to be talking with the various senators about that over the next few days. >> [inaudible] >> i discussed with senator reid several committee assignments, and, of course, it's a very complicated process where he has to determine who's moving where, what openings there are, and i indicated several committees that i would be interested in, but there were no -- there was no promises made except fair and full consideration of my interest as a senator and as a representative of maine. yes, sir. >> [inaudible] >> that was a -- my father used to say, if you don't ask you

don't get. the finance committee certainly i think is going to be a very important committee over the next several years because of the probability of comprehensive tax reform as part of the debt solution. i did raise that with senator reid. he pointed out to me that it took senator kerry 14 years to get on the finance committee so it might be somewhat unlikely for a first-year senator to achieve that, but as i say, never -- no harm in asking. i'm going to leave that between myself and senator reid. >> you said that you -- >> sorry. >> you spoke to senator reid. did you also speak to senator mcconnell? >> i did not speak to senator mcconnell. i did, however, speak to senator blunt who's the second leader in the republican caucus , and we had a very good conversation. so, yes, i did not talk to

senator mcconnell, did talk to senator blunt. also heard from senator corker, johanns, who was a colleague of mine as governor, and a number of other republicans, but the -- the conversation with the republican leadership was with senator blunt. >> why weren't you able to talk with him? >> i'm sorry? >> why didn't you talk with senator mcconnell? >> he didn't contact me. >> what rule, if any, is the negative 'tising that republicans -- advertising that republicans and -- >> i can honestly look you in the eye and say zero. that's history. >> [inaudible] >> the question was what influence, if any, did president obama's victory have? i don't think it had a significant influence. my real focus was, as i

mentioned, two issues -- independence and ability to be effective on behalf of maine. i understand senator reid is here. he wants to see what i've said. senator, thank you. >> senator-elect king represents the best qualities of what a united states senator should be. number one, he's independent. and number two, he's a man of principle. always has been. i welcome him to the caucus where we have strong tradition of independence, no better exemplified by senator lieberman and senator sanders. and i embrace that independence. we as a caucus embrace that independence. i'm confident that senator king

will be a bridge to working with republicans and explaining to the american people what we need to accomplish more for our country. i repeat, i couldn't be happier with any person coming to the caucus than angus king, who i admire and have for many years at a distance. >> thank you, sir. >> that's harry reid with maine independent senator angus king announcing earlier that he'll caucus with senate democrats. we're back live now to what's called the ohio caucus area in the u.s. capitol. earlier democrats announced their election results and we expect republicans to come to the mic soon. we'll have coverage of that until it gets under way. until then, more from today's "washington journal."

host we're joined by kevin brady of texas. good morning. >> thank you, libby. host: welcome back postelection. as congress faces this fiscal cliff, the so-called fiscal cliff that everyone is talking about, what are the right conditions to deal? speaker boehner said under right conditions he will be able to bargain. what are those? guest: i'm constantly optimistic. given the urgency we'll find the solution in time. i think it will be irresponsible. i think republicans believe it will be irresponsible for the president or either party to voluntarily drive off this cliff. one i think it's working towards. i think the key is we need smart balance that gets the economy going, generates more revenue as well as smart spending cuts and restraints. we really think those conditions actually gets the economy moving and, you know, it assures our investors that

we are trying to get our fiscal house in order. host: will you want to rework the tax code? guest: i think it's absolutely critical. i don't think how we resolve the debt crisis without doing the fundamental tax reform. here's a great example. recent analysis showed if the economy over the last three years -- excuse me -- if the economy over the last three years had just been an average recovery, if we were back where we were in 2009, our deficit would be cut in half this year. that goes a long way toward a balanced budget. with spending restraint, we get there and fundamental tax reform i think is key to getting all that capital, you know, off the sidelines, back in the economy to create the jobs we need. so i think fundamental tax reform along with the bipartisan way to preserve social security, medicare over the long haul that averts another credit downgrade, i think those are key elements. host: what about rolling back on the bush-era tax cuts,

letting them expire for those who make over $250,000? president obama is advocating for this. >> yeah, economically it's not a smart move, and it isn't a serious deficit proposal. obviously because so many more people now are in those top tax rates, including the majority of our net business income are in those tax rates. economically it's a loser. and because that would only pay for eight days of federal spending, it's not a serious deficit proposal. but a more serious -- i think the smarter balance, again, the economic growth that generates far more revenues than those tax increases does with the spending restraint, i think that's the smart balance going forward. host: you talk about restructuring the tax code, cleaning it up, it sounds pleasant until you think about, what does that really mean for everyone's bottom line. who would that hit? how would it affect a middle-class taxpayer, how would it affect a higher earner? >> fixing the tax code is hard. if it were it would have been done years ago. because it's become so complex

and such a drag on the economy, and most people think it's unfair. i think the timing is exactly right to do that. and to begin to lower rates and simplify it, you have to take a look at all those tax expenditures. there's a long laundry list of them. i think all of them have to initially be on the table for discussion. let congress and the president actually sit down and bork through all those tough decisions. what i think we're lacking is a firm no fudging deadline to actually do fundamental tax reform. and i think if that's an important part or a key part of this bridge into next year, i think that's going to be hugely helpful. host: what should be the deadline be in guest: next year, 2013. host: end of 2013, december 31? guest: no. i think much earlier for planning purposes. the house has passed its ideas. the president and senate have their ideas. great. pass them. sit down at the table. we're ready to work through the

issues. at the end of the day a real pro-growth tax growth will be good at every income level, especially for those who are looking for jobs. host: if you'd like to talk to congressman kevin brady, republican of texas, here's the number to call. democrats. 202-737-0002. republicans, 202-737-0002. independent callers, 202-628-0205. some of the very popular deductions that americans can take including mortgage deduction. you deal with issues relating to marriage and child tax credits. would those be on the table? >> you know, i think everything has to be. and my belief is to get to a lower rate, not everything can stay in those tax expenditures but not everything will go either. that really is a part of my discussion on capitol hill is what are the elements of the tax bill that will actually grow the economy, to help

families save, work and invest? those are really key components of that tax code? we ought to have that discussion? what are the elements that are most helpful to growing the economy, to saving more which we do a terrible job of in america? investing more as families and businesses, those are all key elements. host: all right. let's go to the phones and hear from bill in denver, colorado, independent caller line. good morning. caller: this is bill. host: you're on the air. go ahead. caller: hey. i got one comment here. on the 47%. 47% of the people don't pay taxes, and wouldn't it be a good idea to put a 1% sales tax on everybody that way everybody gets it? you get criminals in. you get tax cheats in. you get everybody in the program, and everybody plays. this is not 50% of the country

that needs to pay taxes for 300 million people. let's get everybody back in and then go from there. host: bill, do you feel like you pay fair taxes? caller: i pay fair taxes. i pay my taxes. i make $50,000 a year. pay my taxes every single year. i'm self-employed. i pay my liability. i pay my own insurance, everything, but i'm tired of 50% of the people opting out. social security, welfare, everybody's opting out. we have 1% sales tax, everybody in the country gets in. 100%. not 50%. host: thanks for your call, bill. guest: one, adding a new tax on top of all the other federal taxes i think is a mistake. just an invitation for government to tax more and more and more. i do think, one, that 47% figure is really an indictment of how terrible our tax code is

today. it also tells you a lot of people aren't working or are on federal benefits, rely terrifically on the help they get. i think a stronger economy is going to help lower that percentage as well. i'll tell you, i think lowering the rates, sifrlfying the tax code is a very good first step in what congress and the president can do right now. i still hope someday that we have a discussion about eliminating the income tax, the gift taxes, the death taxes and replacing it with a retail sales tax. frankly i think that's the strongest type of tax for our economy of the long all-. it's bold. you know, i don't think congress is right -- ready for it yet. what are the significant changes long term that we can make? host: kathleen is up next, a democratic caller in indiana. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you?

host: good. caller: i have a quick comment and then a question. there was a report, a news report that i heard that came out last week about a report that was done by, i believe, i think it was the tax policy center that went back 50 years, and the report showed that it is a total fall is i that when you -- fallacy that when you raise taxes on the wealthiest 1% that it limits job creation. and the report came out like maybe a year or so ago, and mitch mcconnell buried it. he didn't want that information known. so the news report is out there. the report's out there. i'm sure you can find it. but mitch mcconnell was the one that buried it and didn't want that publicly known that it's a fallacy. and i want to ask, especially you, mr. representative, the

last two years since you people have taken over, you barely have showed up for work, we're paying your salary. i don't see any of you, not one of you putting any skin in this game. you're sitting there. you don't even show up for work for half of the two years you've taken over. we're paying your salary. we're paying your benefits. i don't see you putting any skin in the game. now you talk about my husband has been a seal worker, going into 37 years now. he's got to work about 60 to 80 hours a week to stay in the middle class. he paid in this notion of the 47% don't pay taxes and this notion of entitlement, that word -- my husband has been paying into his benefits for 40 years. and so don't you sit there and tell me -- host: kathleen, we'll get the congressman to respond. let me ask you a quick question.

what do you think about increasing the age of people qualifying for medicare, social security? caller: see. my husband has been a steelworker for going into his 37th year, and he's only 53, but he's been working since the age of 13 and has been paying into his benefits. but i can -- you know, my husband, he's going to work probably another 10 to 15 more years, that's no problem. but all i have to say is i'm real sick of mr. representative -- host: we gont your perspective, kathleen. a fair amount of anger of congress' role. but talk to us about your work in terms of being back in your home district versus being here because congress has been quite absent for the last few months during the election campaign from washington. guest: yeah, during the election campaign. the truth is the house has been extraordinarily productive. you know, we passed i think 39 separate jobs bills to try to get the economy going. we passed a bill to try to -- about $20 trillion of tax cuts

to at least get us back on the path toward a balanced budget again. the problem is all those bills are sitting in the senate. not one of them has a vote on it. we haven't seen leadership from the president on key issues, especially social security, medicare and the debt. be that as it may, this caller made a great point at the very beginning. she asked about a report, and i think she's referring to the congressional research service had a recent report that said tax rates don't matter. but the study they made is flawed. two big flaws in it. one it didn't consider all the state and local taxes. the whole burden on businesses and individuals as far as the committee. major flaw. but here's the big one. they went back 50 years, 1945. looked at the tax rates from 90 %-some and concluded no impact on the economy. the problem is when tax rates were very high it affected a very small amount of the income in america. today, tax rate's at 35%,

affect a lot of families and a lot of small businesses. so today as much as 18% of our total income is affected just by that one top rate. so when you impact that, when you raise that you have a big impact on the economy. so the report is flawed. today things are different than they were in 1945. host: congressman kevin brady, he's in his eighth term representing texas' eighth district, just won re-election. we're watching this week to see leadership decisions made in the republican caucus. what are you watching for? what should we pay attention to? guest: well, we have an embarrassment of riches in really good quality candidates. we have excellent choices at every level. we're going into those conversations here in just a few minutes. i expect us to come out with a very strong team. i expect us to come out very unified in our efforts to try to get the economy going again, tackle this deficit the way it is. and so i'm encouraged by it.

we really got great candidates and great members. host: any tip-off to how you think things will go? guest: i am a terrible prognosticator so don't ask. host: we'll stay tuned. let's hear from nancy who's a republican caller. nancy, where are you joining us from? caller: i'm joining you from florida. host: well, welcome. go right ahead. caller: well, i've been watching this show, and i just really have a couple of comments to make. i am a republican. i did vote for romney, but the election's over, and i do think our republican representatives to represent the republicans of the party, and i kind of wish that president obama would have opened up his meetings to the mom and pops businesses and the franchises instead of all these big corporation names that are meeting aside from the unions that were there yesterday. i just don't feel that the

$250,000 ceiling is fair, that those people struggle to employ people and to keep the communities going and restaurants and franchises and grossry stores and it does -- grocery stores and it does seem like the corporations are taking over the mom and pops, and i just hope the representatives in congress keep representing the republicans out here. . host: since you are a republican, what do you think about letting taxes increase on people who make $1 million or more? chris: that's not a bad idea. i also find it a little ironic this is the first time anything that president bush did is respected by the democrats. i don't know. that's kind of up to our -- that's kind of up to our leaders in congress, but this 250 i

think is ridiculous. i think it's a job killer along with the other regulations. and obamacare. host: congressman brady? guest: it raises a great quefment why should small businesses and families in florida pay more, higher taxes, to pay for president obama's spending. why should they be punished for spending? they don't probably agree with. this is not a smart balance. it's not a serious deficit proposal because it won't pay -- won't get any mingful way back towards a balanced budget. it doesn't grow the economy. we think politically maybe it's a great, smart move. economically, this is why it's not. host: hear from our next caller who is an independent. larry of chicago, illinois. thank you. chris: good morning, libyism representative, i have a couple questions. the first one did you sign the grover norquist tax pledge? guest: yes.

chris: how do you square that with the oval office? it is in dereliction of your oath of office because you have now turned your loyalty to an outsider as opposed to the american people. guest: i agree with that. let me tell you why. that pledge was to my voters. that was to tell them and make it very clear to them that i support raising the top rates or any rates, marginal income tax, i do support lowering rates, closing loopholes, creating more pro-growth tax code. that's exactly what i said in that pledge. i still -- i would still believe it's exactly the right thing to do. chris: i disagree. that isn't what the pledge says. guest: i tell you. i do know that pledge. i read it before i signed it. i reread it recently. in my district, in the eighth district of texas, they believe as do i that we have a spending problem up here not a taxing problem up here.

there is a reason i got nearly 80% of the vote here two weeks ago. those reflect the values of our district. guest: where does grover norquist fit in right now? is that pledge causing problems in terms of being able to negotiate, move forward? guest: i don't think it does. you read it and really think about what it says. it says you don't raise taxes for the fun of it. you don't close loophole deductions for the fun of it. you do it as part of fundamental tax reform to grow the economy more. i think that is the right solution going forward. so i think it's been a nice political bumper sticker type of discussion, but i don't think really relevant to what we are trying to do. host: jackie the democrat in east lake, ohio. hi. chris: good morning. representative, you talk about the 47% that don't pay income taxes in this country. what you are talking about are people who have worked all their lives that are on social

security that they are living on social security. you're also talking about people that work every day of their lives for $8, $9, $10 an hour who are trying to raise their family on that. and because of the fact that they have a family and they have a mortgage, they don't pay taxes. they don't pay federal taxes. they pay state and local and sales taxes and everything else. your social security tax, your fica tax. don't tell me that these people don't pay tax. don't tell me that they are sucking off of the government because they are not. they are working people. and you -- you're just not being fair to them. the other thing i wanted to say, you are talking about grover norquist. this man is an un-elected person who is making you sign a pledge that has nothing to do with -- with the country.

guest: thank you. respectfully disagree on all accounts. especially at the very beginning. you made the case that we are talking about 47%. the fact is, republicans are not. democrats are raising this issue over and over. they see political advantage in it, but one of our frustrations as republicans with that 47% is that many of them don't have the good-paying type of jobs they want that would allow them to be taxpayers. our frustration is that we have an economy that is flying so low and so slow it's very weak. we have so many people unemployed. so many people on food stamps. so many people who don't have a choice they have to rely on the government. we want that 47% to be reduced by stronger economic growth. we want those who begin in the lower classes of income to become middle tax taxpayers. and to rise to higher levels as well.

that's our frustration. host: congressman braidy, we have been talking about this fiscal cliff that congress is grappling with as is the white house. do you expect -- you talked about how you'd like to see a long-term major reform, do you expect something to be hammered out before christmas? are we looking at a last-minute, as congress sometimes likes to do, taking things to the very last deadline they can in this calendar year? guest: congress sometimes likes to do? as congress always does. that's right. i don't -- i'm optimistic. i don't expect an agreement much before the christmas holidays, but i do expect an agreement. i think the key to it is a credible bridge into next year that stops the tax hike, that substitutes smarter spending cuts than those that are slated to occur and really sets that deadline next year for fundamental reform and entitlement reform. i really think that's the key. it's more than doable.

no question in my mind. host: republican in tulsa, oklahoma, good morning. chris: good morning. my comment is, i'm coming at it from a different perspective, but you are talking about the million dollar figure i made a million, $30,000 last year. i got my tax bill from my c.p.a. i'll pay $270,000 in federal income tax. and i'll pay another $45,000 in state tax in the state of oklahoma. and i'm a small business own, we have 300 employees, i will assure you that tax rates do affect businesses. as a an owner, obamacare effects our employee practices as far as benefits we can provide. i noticed that the obama administration is targeting businesses like papa john's pizza, comment openly and honestly saying you add exspent spences to business, the business has to react. it is so naive to watch

different callers say different things. there's a pot of money that comes in, that's rf new. there is a pot of expenses that goes out, those are your expenses, every business and family in america starts with the revenue, prioritizes the expenses, and has something left over to live on. these tax policies, when we roll out the--frankly the press, and i'm not on a tangent on liberal media, using the term it's only going to affect the upper 2% of taxpayers, you really got to flesh that out. i hope the congressman would, too. two represent maybe 40% of all the taxes raised. i would like to seat republicans -- we are talking about 40% of all revenue raised. not get into a 2%. reasonable people who make 50 grand are going $250,000 that's a lot to me. if you are only talking about the upper two people, we are not

-- you are talking about the revenue raised. if you position it properly it would appeal to the issue. host: the president is meeting with business leaders today. is that a move that you thought of? guest: -- chris: i think that's a photo-op. you have a president who has a distaste for business. we've seen it. and he doesn't understand that -- first of all look at his background. he's not a business owner. and the congressman's right that people like me, employees add up, more regulation and the health care law and just higher taxes, it's naive to think that doesn't affect your hiring practices. i found a ton of money in cash, for me, i'm terrified of the stock market right now. you're sitting in cash at 125 basis points earning no investment return.

host: congressman brady? guest: what we hear from businesses of all size back home along main street. that the higher taxes, more regulationings. the president's health care law is changing their hiring patterns. no question about it. his point, too, there is a lot of capital sitting on the sideline. people want to invest. doesn't make any money. he makes it by investing it in new buildings, equipment, software, salespeople. businesses are reluctant to do that. the president's higher taxes doesn't encourage that investment and discourages the smarter balance has got to be stronger growth, smarter restraint, and i'm still convinced that blake, who would be in that 1%, supposedly the wealthy, he already shoulders more than 1/3 of the cost of all federal government. the top 5%, almost 2/3 of that.

why don't we encourage more people to get into those brackets through economic growth rather than just taxing them? host: congressman, payroll tax holiday is one of the items on the table here during the fiscal cliff. we may see payroll taxes go back up. an interview you did in the fall, just about a month ago, with cnbc, you said that tax holiday is essentially blowing a hole in security. guest: it is. host: is that a tax increase? guest: i think we -- i don't think there's any way responsibly, if you are serious about social security is and medicare, can you keep that payroll tax holiday going. budget gimmicks aside, we are borrowing between $140le with to $160 billion from foreign investors. and the fed just to pay social security is this year. so i think the holiday needs to end. we need to replace those with lower tax rates of an equal or greater amount through fundamental tax reform. i think that's one of the

factors that should drive the president and congress, both parties, to sit is down at that table. i really think this is more -- works for us. host: if that goes away, americans will see less money in their paychecks. guest: if we move to 10% rate for most americans, 25% rate for those who are wealthier, we have a chance to lower those tax rates for every worker. host: ron, ashland, kentucky. ron is an independent caller. good morning. chris: good morning. thank you for c-span. thank you, mr. brady, for your service. it is appreciated. we are a small business owners and first off we do sports, i sincerely hope that at least sends the president a message that we are not happy with the direction of this nation. i also am a small business owner and we -- right after this

election we sent out our layoff notices. we are going to downsize our work force by 50%. we are not very big. we are just a small little carpet store, but we have our expenses as everyone else. and we are going to see what happens the next two years. right now we are just going to cut our work force. we are going to throw out contracts for the next two years, and we are at the age where we can -- if we want to sell out, we can, and retire. guest: what you are telling me is what we hear all the time back home. what would you do? what would you advise congress and the president to do to get the economy going to encourage you to hire rather than shrink your work force? chris: first off this health care bill is devastating to small businesses. what we are looking at is literally going -- cutting into

our grocery money. we love the boys that work for us. they are great guys. le with what's coming down the pike, there is no way we can be able to sustain ourselves. again, we are in our 50's. we don't -- we have been fortunate--to be successful. but we don't -- they got to stop spending. we are sick of being lied to and having our money stolen. that's exactly what's happened. host: we'll get a response from the congressman. guest: the point is, that much of what's happening out of washington is is a drag on the economy. we've got to remove those roadblocks. i think taxes, red tape, and the president's health care law are jackknifed across our economy. we need to remove the roadblock. we are willing to work with the president and the senate democrats, because this was a

mandate, i think, for congress and president to work together and lead. there's ways to do this and get it done. host: our last caller, ron mentioned he's a proponent of the secessionist movement. people wanting to breakway from america. there are people in texas advocating for that? guest: it's a nonissue. texans are proud to be americans. we are proud to support this country. we just think it can handle its business a little better. no, we don't support secession. host: representing texas eighth district. thanks sow. >> you are looking at the ohio corridor in the capitol. a frequent meeting place for both republicans and democrats. we are waiting to see the senate republican leadership come out for election results. we are going to carry that live when it happens. we do have news coming out of capitol hill this morning. house democratic whip, steny hoyer, released the following statement. announcing his bid for democratic whip. quote, over the past few days i have had the opportunity to

speak with many of my colleagues and i appreciate the support i have received from them to remain democratic whip. i look forward to working with leader pelosi as we keep our caucus united and continue our efforts to return to the majority. unquote. that is whip sten hoyer. again we are waiting for the republican senate to come out and while we wait for that, we have more stuff for you. portion of an event that happened earlier today. democratic national committee chairman debi wasserman schultz, talked about -- debbie wasserman schultz, talked about the recent elections and effect on the nation's women. about five minutes. >> let's go through that for a second. i think it's important, by the way, women came out for president obama with 55% of the vote. 184 women ran for congressional office this year, and 40% of the u.s. population now has at least one woman senator. there is no longer an all-male state legislature anywhere in the country.

nowhere. new hampshire, which is also my home away from home, now has an all women congressional delegation. and a woman governor, as well as a female statehouse and state senate leader. they are not both democrats, that's ok. they are still women. we are moving in the right direction. and this is my favorite, on the 113th congress, gavels in in january, it will be an all-time high of 20 women senators and 81 women in the house of representatives. [applause] >> this is awesome. now, that is particularly gratifying given that we came off -- i remember being on a -- in a similar discussion just two years ago just lamenting and agonizing that we had dropped the number of women in congress for the first time since 1982 after the 2010 elections. some of us thought, oh, my gosh, how did we lose the momentum? how are we going to get it back? it's so critical. there was a lot of soul-searching. you know what? rather than spend two years hand

wringing, women got to work. and we got to work recruiting. and then thankfully -- not thankfully, we were clearly helped by the republicans because out of the gate they had a decision to make. when they took over the house majority, they could have taken a more moderate path. unlikely given the tea party extremists they elected in 2010. but h.r. 3, the third bill out of the gate, if you recall, was the bill that would have redefined rape as forcible rape. that sent the clearest signal to women about what was in store for us across the country. they could have left it at that. but then the assault on planned parenthood, title 10, the idea we should refight the battle over whether we have access to affordable birth control. and the list goes on. and then we know how the rest of the election blade out.

i can tell you and i'll just -- i'll conclude with this because you guys are going to hear t. you have an amazing panel, led by dee dee myers, who has stayed in the fight and did an incredible and remark leader and also a mom. the whole ginger rogers, women do all the same things that men do, but they do it in high heels backwards, that's really what it's all about. it means -- i'd love to have a man spend a day in the life of the women in this room and try to get done what we balance together in order to make sure that we can make everything work and help the people that we care about thrive. the important thing here is that we continue to move forward. we have to double down. we have to double down in 2014. we've got to make sure we recruit more women to run for office because it's not just a slogan that when women run, women win. they do. they dofment when women run, democrats win because we have --

you take a look at the -- take a good look when the house convenes after this next congress is sworn in, at what our slile looks like versus the republican slile. -- republican side of the aisle looks like. versus the republican. we have a majority minority female caucus in the democrats. first time in history. no matter what i do, i will be helping you double down, doing everything i can to make sure that we can move women forward. help president obama move this country forward. and make sure that when it comes to the issues that matter to women, as the mother after 13 an 9-year-old daughter, i can look out and see a lot of other moms in this audience, that we make sure that we make life better for the generation of young girls we are raising, and most importantly, in terms of professional development, that we reach, each of us, every

single time we are in a program like this, we need to remind ourselves to reach behind us and pull another woman up on that next rung of the ladder as you move up to the one in front of you. it's critical. we have to replace ourselves. too many women don't make that a priority. that's what emily's list is all about. so we have leadership opportunities for women in the future. thank you so much and congratulations. [applause] >> the ohio corridor, it's a frequent meeting place for both republicans and democrats in the capitol. we continue to wait for the senate republican leadership election results. and we'll carry that live when it does happen. while we wait for that, more from the "washington journal" with a discussion on the so-called fiscal cliff. >> we are joined right now by jason dick, the house editor of "roll call" thanks for being here on a busy morning. we are looking at leadership in

the house and senate after the elections members come back to washington and figure out who will take the lead, essentially, in the next congress. 113th congress. what are we seeing so far? >> what we are seeing is that the biggest decision, biggest news we are anticipating happened even though that won't officially be decided until after thanksgiving, nancy pelosi announced just a few minutes ago that she'll be staying on as minority leader. staying on in the congress. there was a lot of speculation whether she would step down or whether she would continue. she has made the decision to continue as minority leader. and -- that won't be the -- the caucus won't vote on that until after they return from thanksgiving. we also have a bunch of leadership elections in the republican conference and in the house and both caucuss in the snafment >> leader pelosi has announced her attention. how much of a done deal is that? could there be a rebellion or pushback? guest: as the election people would say it's cooked or it's

baked. at this point. the only speculation really was, if she had decided to leave whether either minority whip steny hoyer would ascend and make a bid or whether nancy pelosi would get behind someone else who she thought could be a leader for the democratic caucus. there really is no drama. she'll be the next minority leader. host: in about 10 minutes' time, leader pelosi will hold a press conference with women members of the democratic caucus. you can find that live on c-span2. let's talk about the senate for a minute. their meetings and choices about leadership. guest: they are meeting right now. it's a -- it will be a fairly seamless process. the democrats, we are not expecting any change in the top three, harry reid will return as the democratic leader, dick durbin, the majority whip, and chuck schumer, the third ranking. on the republican side, mitch mcconnell will in all likelihood unless something catastrophic

happens retain his job as minority leader. because the minority whip right now, john kyl, is retiring, he's from my home state of arizona, he's retiring, john cornyn, who was the chairman of the republican's campaign committee in the senate will be moving up to the whip spot. and taking his place at this point is senator jerry moran from kansas. host: jason dick, taking your phone calls. here are the numbers, democrats can call in at 202-585-3880. republicans can call 202-585-3881, and independent callers, 202-585-3882. circle back to the house and look at republicans in the house. what we are seeing in terms of leadership there. at the top things look stable but there is a big question. guest: there is a big question. the top three leaders will be retaining their spots. speaker john boehner will get another term as speaker. eric cantor will be the majority

leader and kevin mccarthy will be the majority whip. the contest that is up for the number four slot and that's between representative mcmorris rodgers, a republican from washington, who was the arguably the top congressional liaison for the romney-ryan presidential campaign. and tom price -- she's also the vice conference chairwoman of the caucus right now. and then tom price is the republican policy committee chairman and he is a -- considered a more partisan warrior in the republican conference. he's a former chairman of the conservative republican study committee. they are making their opening arguments this morning. they started at 9:00 a.m. got overshadowed by nancy pelosi's announcement. late other this afternoon the republicans will choose between those two people. between kathy mcmorris rodgers or tom price. host: to the phones and hear from jerry in quincy, massachusetts, democrats line. hi. chris: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i'd like to say -- if people are

really serious about entitlements that would automaticallier or as soon as possible pass glass steagall, reinstating glass-steagall would separate, as you know, the commercial banks on the investment houses. because of the glass steagall, the population of-glass-steagall, the population, the banks that otherwise wouldn't have to be bailed out, the too big to fail banks, the $229 trillion with a t dollars, if we reinstate glass steagall and fund things -- go back through a credit system through a national bank which only directs funds and credits to things like north american water and power lines. things like that that would create tens of millions of jobs and really -- that's how you build up the tax base. forget about taxes and cutting entitlements.

we need to make this country productive again. >> jason, our issues of banking and finance on the table? we are looking at a lot of issues on the so-called fiscal cliff in the lame duck session. are 350e78 faulking about? guest: i doubt it. the emphasis is how can they figure out how to lessen the pain. everybody has said seemingly everything is on the table, ball the different sides have retreated into their corners on taxes, spending, sequestration, all these things. even though we have six weeks to go this year, for the congress to arrive at some sort of agreement, even if it's just punting and freezing the current systems, i think that big-ticket items like revisitting d.o.d. frank or glass-steagall will be pushed off to a later time. host: the leadership elections, house republicans. you talked about the two candidates vying for that fourth

spot in republican leadership. will you get any indication of the direction of the congress based on who is able to get that leadership post? will that give any sense the republican caucus and what they plan to use as their direction in the next couple weeks and into the new congress? guest: i think so. kathy mcmorris rodgers, even though she is -- has been very much out there in front of republican causes and so forth, i think i mentioned she was a top surrogate for the romney-ryan campaign, she is regarded as a little bit more favorable toward leadership. she's a member of leadership right now. she's a more reliable vote for the leadership. there is a sense she would be a little less antagonistic than some of the more conservative elements of the republican conference. tom price has, again, has a reputation for being a little bit more hard-edge, partisan warrior. he has the backing of some of the more conservative elements of the republican conference. yesterday in one of his first

communications to the colleagues since the election, paul ryan came out very strongly in favor of tom price. suggesting that the -- if tom price wins then paul ryan, his credibility is sort of juiced, will go up in terms of his influence on -- on the republican conference. if price wins it might signal a more conservative, hard-edged bent to the republicans. if mcmorris rodgers wins, it might signal the leadership is starting to get this house in order and wanting to moderate some -- at least its approach. host: hear from chris, republican caller, joining us from round lake, illinois. good morning. chris: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question here. as a fiscal cliff comes and you are discussing what to do with it, with social security and medicare, i was wondering why the public employees in congress and senators don't pay into that

system, why they are eliminated from it. host: we are running out of time before the house comes in. our caller bringing up one of the many issues that we'll be addressing as we watch the lame duck session. thank you so much for coming in on a busy morning for roll call. house editor, appreciate the time. >> you are looking at the ohio cord door in the capitol. while we continue to wait for the republicans to come out and talk to the press, we have more from today's "washington journal." now it's retiring ohio republican congressman steven latourette. host: our guest talking about the lame duck session and the fiscal cliff. congressman steven latourette, republican of ohio. he sits on the appropriations committee. thank you for being here. you're in your last few weeks of legislating. you are an outgoing member of congress. your term ends in january. why are you leaving? why didn't you run for re-election? guest: because this place has

gotten a little too toxic for me. when are you in public life you have to balance the cost to you as a person and family versus the good that you can do. things that were no-brainers, i have been here for 18 years, no-brainers like the farm bill, the highway bill, student loan interest rate discussions we have to fight about everything. and it's taken it's toll. time to move on. host: do you see that coming to bear in the discussion abouts the so-called fiscal cliff? a lot of financial issues on the table. taxes, budget, sequestration. is that going to be a problem? guest: it's going to be a problem if people misread the election results. if the president and his party say they got a mandate to to do whatever they want, or the republicans in the house to say they have a mandate, that isn't what the election was about. the election at least in ohio, which is the epicenter of it all, they expect results. and that means maybe you don't

get 100% of what you want. maybe you get 50%, 60%, that's a good day at the office, but you can't draw these lines in the sand and say, we are going to work this out but, don't talk about any of the stuff i care about. so everybody's saying the right stuff. the president's saying the right things. speaker boehner and harry reid. but it needs to translate into when they get behind closed doors that people are looking for common ground rather than a leg up in the next election. host: which of the g.o.p. leadership due to get tea party members onboard when it comes to negotiating and bargaining. you have worked for many years with house speaker john boehner, both from ohio. what advice did you give him? >> that he has to, without abandoning principle, when people seem to lose sight in this tax discussion, if you look at a $5 trillion package over 10 years, 1.5 frill to $2 trillion in new revenues needs to be a part of that. i think most republicans, i know the speaker accepts that.

it's how you get there. so from our perspective if you broaden the base of taxpayers and actually get rid of all the underbrush, you could raise that money, the modeling shows it. on the democratic side they want to sock it to the top 2% of wage earners. people in country are rich. they didn't get rich by being stupid. you really run the risk of casing them to say i'm not going to pate personal income tax rate anymore, i'm going to look for some of these loopholes and deductions. there is a way to get there. if there is a will there is a way. we are going to see over the next little bit where the will is? host: congressman was just here to talk about what the loopholes might be. as you look at restructuring the tax code, should there be deductions for mortgage, education, middle class tax deductions should be on the table? guest: they should be on the table but not for the middle class. if you look at -- i partnered

with jim cooper, simpson-bowles on the floor. this congress, seems like the last congress, we got 38 votes. what that says is maybe for somebody making $2 million living on a $5 million house, maybe you don't need the full home interest mortgage deduction that someone making $50,000 or $60,000 needs to be in the house. there is a way to get to it. look at chirtible contributions. if you look at them, simpson bowls tagged that to 2% of income. that's reasonable. it doesn't dry up the charitable giving in this country. it also says to the wealthy you can't shelter and avoid paying income tagses. if people are willing to have an honest discussion about this, it can be done. if people retreat to their corners and say we are going to make bumper stickers, it's not going to work. host: you just mentioned that you introduced legislation along the lines of simpson-bowles. you only got 38 members voting

for that. but it sounded like you had more who expressed support early on. what was the problem? can that be a framework in the new incoming congress? guest: it can. the gang of 38, or eight in the senate, they are gang, they have to be a gang in the senate, our 38, they are meeting today and yesterday, the 38, they come them the great 38 who had the courage to do that. we are going to meet on friday. the simpson-bowles legislation is not on any legislative language. what happened is we had 100 members, republicans and democrats, who had signed the letter saying sort of a whip operation, we believed we were going to get over 100 votes that day. what happened is, when we introduced it, exactly what i'm talking about, the anti-tax crowd, mr. norquist and his bunch came in saying it's a $2 trillion tax increase. that was crap. then on the other side, we are eviscerating, taking away

medicare and social security. that's false. as long as people are willing to look at on a tax side that we can raise revenue without soaking rich people and making them pay 50% of their income, on the sniment side if we recognize when social security was founded the life expectancy in this country was 63. today it's 79. you're not driving a 1935 automobile, neither am i, and to look at these programs in the light of 2012 isn't cutting people. it's saying we got to figure out a better way. the political calculation some of these folks make is that senior citizens are greedy. senior citizens are not greedy. but they want to receive what they paid into. they would also buy into the argument that their grandchildren should be protected. they love their grandchildren just as much as they love themselves. host: hear from patricia, democratic caller joining us from harvey, louisiana. go ahead. chris: yes. my concern is i was wondering

why all the businesses that are holding all this money on the sidelines, because they say that they can't invest their money because of the uncertainty that's going on, i'd like to know -- they can earn some interest on that money, why don't they take all this money and loan it to the federal government so they can pay down the deficit while they are hanging on to it? and then that would allow the government to do the things that they need to do and they won't be burdened down by the deficit and they'll be earning some income on their money that they are investing with the government to pay down the deficit. that's my comment. host: let's hear what the congressman has to say. guest: that's an interesting proposal. the first part first. and that is why are they sitting on the sidelines? you got to think if it's your money and your bank account and you don't know what your taxes are going to be next year, what your health care costs are going

to be next year, you don't want -- know what regulations will plague you. it doesn't surprise me people who are in business, remember they are in business, many of them answer to their shareholders. it's not just their doe. and so -- dough. i understand the uncertainty. i think the government has a responsibility to restore some of that certainty. the other point -- the answer to the question is the government doesn't pay the interest rate that they can earn through other investments. government investments are safe at the moment but they are not really money makers. and you're running into the same problem of the fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, they can't just say i got $1 billion laying here. let's give it to uncle sam and maybe they'll pay me back, maybe they won't. the caller's question is on the mark if that we have to think outside the box. we got to be creative about this thing. find common ground. it's easy to not agree and not fix this thing. that's easy. there are some people in this town that say, let the -- all of

the bush tax cuts expire. let's not fix the fiscal cliff thing. let's have see questions stration take place. you raise about $3 trillion. and you can go home with an honest face and say i didn't vote to raise your taxes because you didn't. they expired automatically. could you go to the defense contractors in the road and say i didn't cut your program. i didn't vote for it. doing nothing really isn't responsible. host: let's hear from lakeland, florida, republicans line. good morning. chris: good morning. praise be for c-span. congressman, the fiscal cliff debate is pushing aside a consideration for a problem that's eminent threat to the united states, and that's the sun flares knocking out our national electric grid next year. it was outlined in the june, 2012, national geographic. there is a bill pending before congress, house bill 668, the shield act, that's just been pushed aside. would you please work with my

congressman, dennis ross? i have been working with him and his staff to push this. this is an eminent danger to the united states. could you work -- get this debated and passed in the lame duck congress? >> we'll breakway from this "washington journal" piece now. a quick reminder, watch this or any "washington journal" segment on line any time at c-span.org. we are live now at the u.s. capitol where republican senators are coming out to talk about their congressional leadership elections. live coverage on c-span. >> many ways to continue the status quo with divided government. we have a lot of big challenges confronting us here at the end of the cycle. but i would remind everyone that divided government sometimes has done very important things for the country. think of ronald reagan and tip o'neill reforming social security. ronald reagan and tip o'neill doing the last comprehensive tax reform. bill clinton and republican congress doing welfare reform and balancing the budget.

we look forward to making this divided government productive for the american people. and we have, of course, as everyone well knows, a lot of challenges here at the end of the year. i'll be meeting with the president and the other leadership on friday to talk about the way forward. and we look forward to being a part of the solution to these significant problems. it's my plesh shoe now to turn to our newly elected whip, senator john cornyn of texas. >> thanks, mitch. it's an honor to be elected by my colleagues to serve as the whip. the assistant leader on the republican side. as leader mcconnell said, we have a lot of very difficult work to do, but we are committed to working with our colleagues across the aisle to solving the nation's urgent problems. we know what those are in the lame duck. we know what those are going forward. there is no mystery about that,

nor is there any mystery to some of the clutions based on the president's own bipartisan fiscal commission and others that have laid out the road map and have known shown us a way to address those issues. i'm looking forward to working more closely with my colleagues now in a new capacity. i appreciate their confidence they placed in me and i view as my role model for that the service of senator john kyl who will remain our whip through the end of the year who has been an outstanding member of the united states senate and somebody who has left very big shoes to fill. >> i, too, want to thank my colleagues for the opportunity to serve as a member of our leadership and looking forward to working with our leadership to do things with the country. the elections are over with and this is an opportunity for us to turn the page, but that means the president of the united states has got to lead. he's got to step forward and help us deal with his most immediate crisis, which is the fiscal cliff, and then as we

look down the road, to the things that we can do that will really get this country back on track, get the economy growing again, create jobs, put americans back to work, those are all things that are in our grasp, that are in sight if we are willing to do the right things to make them happen. of course we all know that the issue that's being debated right now is the issue of taxes. there's so much analysis out there, so many economist, so many groups who have studied this issue very carefully and who have said if we raise taxes in a down economy, it's going to cost us economic growth next year. it's going to cost us $700,000 jobs. it's going to reduce take-home pay for many americans. that is a wrong direction in which to go, but we believe that the president, if he is willing to, has an opportunity here to work with republicans. we stand ready here in the senate, house republicans do as well, to work with him on a solution that will deal with this immediate crisis with the fiscal cliff. just as importantly the long-term fiscal solvency of

this country and getting our economy growing and getting americans back to work. >> i also want to thank my colleagues for allowing me to continue as chairman of the republican policy committee, continue to work with my colleagues on the issues that all of americans are concerned about. and those are the issues of jobs, the economy, the debt, and spending. i'm going to continue to provide them with credible, reliable, accurate, and timely information to make sure each of them can be most effective as we deal with these major issues facing our country. >> the new member of this group, it's a real pleasure to be here. i look forward to developing a good working relationship with those who have cameras and microphones. express my gratitude to my colleagues for giving me the opportunity to serve in this capacity. we certainly will work hard to see that good things happen in a political sense for republican senators. but i fully recognize that the success of politics follows

governing well. i'm looking forward to working with leader mcconnell and others within our conference to make sure that we make the right decisions on behalf of america so that if we do our jobs well, as united states senators, good things will happen in the political realm as well. we are working hard to develop the right team at the senate campaign committee, and i'm pleased to tell you that senator rob portman has agreed to be the vice chairman for finance, to help us in acquiring the necessary resources for success, and senator elect ted cruz has agreed to serve as the vice chairman of the nrsc for purposes of grassroots operations and political outreach. we have already in place the beginnings of a team that will work hard to make a difference not just on behalf of republicans, but on behalf of all americans. thank you very much. >> take a couple questions.

>> yesterday the white house reis rated their request for $26 billion in revenue as part of a $4 trillion package. is that s. anything along the lines of $1.6 trillion something you think republicans could ultimately agree to if there were entitlements alongside? >> can i only echo what the speaker said very correctly last week. republicans believe that there is a way to get additional revenue. we also believe that additional revenue should be tied to the only thing in a are -- will save the country in the long run and that is reforming entitlements. we know that you can't raise taxes enough to solve the problem. in fact, the big argument during the campaign over whether or not we should raise tax rates on people above $250,000, would have produced enough revenue to fund the government for six days. so we know it may abgood

political talking point but doesn't deal with the problem. we are opened to discussing all of this with the president. we all -- everybody who studied the issue knows that until you make our entitlement programs fit the future demographic of our country, demographics of our country, you can't possibly solve our long-term deficit problem. we are opened to discussing all of this with the president. as you know we had endless discussion abouts it last year. the american people have chosen divided government once again, as i said earlier, divided government frequently has done big things for the country and we are ready to sit down and talk about it. as you know the first meeting that i'll be involved in is friday. >> what changes do you make politically, policywise going forward to make sure you pick up seats in 2014? >> we are going to turn the corner. the american people have spoken. they voted basically for the status quo. we still have a republican

house, democratic senate, and democratic president. i think they are saying they want us to tackle some of these problems and get them behind us. today is not a day to continue the campaign. in fact, we ought to turn the campaign off and turn the corner and start working on these serious problems that confront us. we are ready to sit down with the president and democratic majority in the senate and get to work. thanks a lot. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> so the senate republicans announced their leadership positions for the 113th congress and they also answered some questions. earlier today the democrats did the same thing and can you watch both briefings online at c-span.org. going to have look at the u.s. capitol here where the house will return for legislative business at noon eastern. until then we'll have a portion of the democrats' briefing from earlier. we'll show you as much as we can until the house gavels back in.

>> i think that means most of them are here.

good morning. more coming. more coming. yesterday when we gathered here i began my comments standing here with our new members of congress by saying a picture is worth 1,000 words. that's what they say. i said then and i say now that this picture before you is worth millions of votes. millions of votes. [applause] millions of women's votes that it took to re-elect president barack obama. [applause] millions of women's votes who helped us elect a record number

of women to the congress of the united states. as you look forward understand that you are looking into the future. the future of empowerment of women in america. you saw some of these faces yesterday among the new members elect. i said then that they were part of the most diverse caucus in the history of the world, the first time that a parliamentry body would have a party where a majority of women and minorities. as its strength. we are very, very proud of that. said yesterday we did not have this majority, but we have the gavel. excuse me, we don't have the gavel. we don't have it.

we have something more important , we have unity. we do not have the gavel, we do not have the majority. but we have unity. i think our caucus this morning demonstrated that very clearly. so i come here with my sisters, when i came to congress 25 years ago there were about 23 members of congress who were women. out of 435. just think of that. 12 democrats, 11 republicans. something like that. today we have over 60 house democratic women. very good. [applause] not enough. we want more. but all of us who were there

that dozen early on, dozen of us there, we all took responsibility to try to pull more women into congress in our state delegation and across the country. i'm very proud that in california our delegation of democrats is a majority of women, not even counting our two senators, senator feinstein and senator boxer. women are empowered in california. i also want to acknowledge that although our numbers are great here, two of our colleagues have gone on to the senate, senator elect tammy baldwin. and senator-elect mazie hirono. only the second woman of color to serve in the senate. so that's pretty exciting. and unfortunately we won't have kathy hochul and betty sutton in this next congress, but the

future is soon and coming upon us and we know they will be making a great public prohibition. here we are. in the past week since the election we are still finishing up some of our campaign. we are very proud of the success, as i said yesterday, and as you see here today. why is it important for us to make this statement of the strengths of women in the congress of the united states? of the house democratic women. because this is where the hopes and dreams of america's families are riding. they may not know that. they may not know one party from the next and the rest. but we know that without rosa delauro we would not have lily ledbetter. [applause] >> without gwen moore, we would not have the violence against women act being put forth the

way it is. thank you. jackie speier working so hard with other members of our caucus, loretta sanchez, to protect women in the military. we are so very, very proud of the chair of the democratic national committee, debbie wasserman schultz, who is here with us. i could go around here and talk about the leadership certainly susan davis, women in the military has been her issue for a long time. in any event, the point is that if america is going to reach its full filament -- full fulfillment as a nation, we must have the further empowerment of women. women in the military, if we want to be our congress strongest, we must give women every opportunity to hold every

job so that they can one day attain the top job. we want women in business, how could it be that they are fortune 500 and fewer than 20 c.e.o.'s of fortune 500. if we want our economy to flourish and grow, we must lift up women's leadership in our economy. very important. women in the academic world, women in health care, any subject you can name. is more wholesome, more successful, more efficient with the involvement of women. women came to the polls when, women came to the polls last week, they registered their support for those who understood the challenges that women face. it's reelingly a remarkable thing. under the leadership of the

women standing here the voices of mothers, daughters, grandmothers will be heard. women are the pred winners for our families in many cases the small business owners in our community, isn't that right, nydia velazquez? and the workers that will serve our prosperity. holding jobs, that they also are creating jobs and entrepreneurs and owners. we also know women are focused on the same issues. all of us are. the economy, jobs, fuhr of the middle class, and the national security of our country they are concerned about fiscal soundness for america because they think about the future. as we move forward to debate our economic and fiscal challenges in the weeks and months ahead, one thing is clear, our economic agenda, choices and decisions will be viewed through the perspective and the eyes of our

nation's women and their needs. and those of their families. i have decided in light of all of the excitement accompanying our beautifully diverse caucus, and san francisco i always say the beauty is in the mix, that's also where the strength is in the mix. and the size of our women's caucus i'm not satisfied, we want more. but we are the largest element of political leadership for women in the country. larger than it's ever been. so i have made the decision that some you may have some interest in, in order to continue work on empowering women, to making sure our affordable care act enforced in way that no longer a woman will be a pre-existing medical condition -- [applause]

>> to work with the president to create jobs and grow our economy in a way that empowers women in the work plies, to talk about a healthy political climate, to work with women, to say we know one way to increase the involvement of women of government and politics, you must reduce the role of money and increase the level of civility and that would be a very good thing for our country. [applause] >> healthy nation, a healthy political arena, a healthy planet. i'm so pleased to hear what the president said about a clean energy job for the future. as you know that has been -- >> we are going break away from this press conference now as the u.s. house is returning for business. a quick reminder you can watch in its entirety on line at c

span.org. the house is about to gavel back in. five bills to be considered. include one dealing with the natural gas pipeline for new york and new jersey. there are no votes scheduled for today. now live to the house floor, live on c-span.

the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered today by our guest chaplain, rev rands donna kiefer, arizona legislative chaplainsy, peoria, arizona. the chaplain: let us pray. dear holy and righteous father, as this honored bodies of congress convenes today, we come first to humbly submit ourselves before you. acknowledging you as lord and creator. the one who directs the paths of those who call upon your precious name. savior god, we also want to thank you for your infinite grace, your divine mercy, and for the deep love that you extend to each of us. father, i ask that you faithfully have health, wisdom and clarity of mind on our leaders as they attend to the many critical tasks at hand.

provide each member with an ever-increasing abundance of comfort, peace and a renewed sense of purpose. lord, may we grasp the full spectrum of your character so that our love for you might never waiver and, sovereign god, may your life-giving truth preside here forevermore, in the name of my savior jesus, amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from minnesota, mr. walz. walz wals please honor america -- mr. walz: please honor america with our pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: without objection, the gentleman from arizona, mr. franks, is recognized for one

minute. mr. franks: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i was gratified today to hear our beloved citizen of arizona, chaplain donna kiefer, to offer our prayer. the chaplain is the author of two books, "woman of courage," "women of faith" and she's currently working on a third book called "women of grace." and that will complete the series "gardens of grace." mr. speaker, i think it's especially appropriate because indeed donna is woman of grace that i've had the privilege to know for a very long time and so grateful to be able to call her friend. she has made her aim in life to serve her god, her country, her family and the truth. and she serves as the appointed chaplain for the arizona state legislature where she has provided spiritual encouragement for leaders, staff and state employees for 14 years now, mr. speaker. the chaplain has a masters

degree in ministry through phoenix university of theology and has received chaplainsy training through the southwest school of chaplainsy. the chaplain is an arizona native. she lives in peoria, arizona, with her husband of 23 years, ross, a firefighter-paramedic. and their daughter, andrea, a 20-year-old college student. they've been members of christ's church of the valley in northwest peoria for nearly 18 years under the noble leadership of pastor don wilson. and it is my honor to be her guest today and, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain 15 further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? >> the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to honor the life of kenneth bennett as an explosives ordinant technician, he put his life on the line every day to protect rur his

comrades. as a former e.o.d. tech myself, i know the danger bennett faced and today i honor his ultimate sacrifice. staff sergeant kenneth ben set an american hero. he entered the army in 2004 and in 2006 he trained to be an explosive ordinance explosive technician. then he was serving what was supposed to be his last deployment to afghanistan. mr. crawford: he won many awards for his service. i did not know personally staff sergeant bennett but i do know this. he was a son, a husband, a father and a friend to many. staff sergeant bennett leaves behind his wife, mannedy, their 2-year-old daughter, and another child on the way. because he served america and the world are more free. nixes are the first line of defense. the e.o.d. community deserves the respect and full resources of the department of defense to continue saving lives. god bless the memory of staff sergeant kenneth bennett and may god continue to bless the

united states of america. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentlelady from texas is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: first, i think appropriate to to welcome back my colleagues and to congratulate all of those who have chosen again if re-elected to serve this great, great nation and for those for the first time who have the honor and privilege of being in this storied institution. we can come together and make a difference in the lives of americans and we can in fact find way to help the most vulnerable, the impoverished and those who work err day. i know we can solve this problem of sequestration. i lead now into something that is quite contrary to the idea of america's issues and problems. and ask my colleagues to join me in supporting a

congressional gold medal for a little girl who was shot in the head by the taliban in pakistan, standing up for education for our children and for her fellow boys and girls. what an amazing young lady. now, healing in a british hospital, 61 million children worldwide are not enrolled in school. we're advocating or many around the world are advocating for a nobel peace prize for her. i believe the congressional gold medal symbolizes those who are willing to suffer for others and make a difference. i ask my colleagues to join me. the united nations declared saturday, november 10, 2012, as the holiday to highlight the ac lack of access to education for 32 million girls. we can stand with girls and boys around the world and we stand with our children. support the congressional gold medal for the little girl who is willing to stand up to the taliban. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. >> american people have voiced their demands for an end to the partisan gridlock that has for far too long plagued washington. they expect their elected officials to work across party lines and the branches of government to solve the challenges facing our nation. mr. desjarlais: unless we act now, we run the risk of allowing this country to go off a fiscal cliff in january. this would have both severe economic and security ramifications. the fed secretary pennetta says it would be devastating to our national defense. the county from earnston young said it would cost us 700,000 jobs. almost every american would fall victim to a tax increase. this would be an unacceptable blow to our economy that is still struggling to get back on its feet. house republicans have already passed legislation to address these issues and stand ready to build upon them to avert this

crisis. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota seek recognition? without objection, the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized for one minute. ms. mccollum: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the american people expect congress to go to work, to create jobs and grow our economy. we all heard that message loud and clear in last week's election. we have an opportunity to save 75,000 american jobs right now. by extending the win production tax cut. in minnesota, this tax cut helped create an entire industry, employ thoses of people from construction workers to high-tech analysts. and all of these jobs now, well, they're under threat. the same pioneer ran a story called win energy jobs. minnesota companies are forced to lay off workers because the house has failed to act.

last quarter there was not one new single project announced in america because of the uncertainty of the tax credit. this is unacceptable and it is completely avoidable. there is strong bipartisan support for extending this credit. congress cannot wait until december 31. i urge congress to pass the win production energy tax bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise to recognize a woman who embodies dedication to public service. and the best of what we hope for in our public officialless. recently mayor arlene molder of arlington heights announced her retirement. ending a long and successful tenure. the mayor served her community as village president for 20 years. the longest serving village president in arlington heights history. she is respected by her

colleagues and constituents alike for her commitment to work together and to better her community. she has been an advocate for local businesses, helped transform downtown arlington heights into the beautiful and vibrant area that it is today. i want to express my appreciation for mayor molder's 34 years in public service as village president, trustee and park district commissioner. her commitment to making arlington heights a better community is exactly what we look for in our public officials. i know she will continue to contribute in great ways to our communities and i look forward to working with her in the future. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute,revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mr. walz: thank you, mr. speaker. last week the american people spoke and i for one heard them loud and clear. quit arguing and get your damage work done. my suggestion is we've got a piece that we can do today. pass the farm bill for america. america's farming economy has been one of the bright spots

over the last five years and our farmers and our consumers deserve some certainty. the house has already passed through the ag committee with a 2/3 vote the farm bill. the senate passed a farm bill with a 2/3 majority. they couldn't agree it's wednesday over there yet they passed a farm bill. this bill adds certainty to rural america, it creates jobs on main street, it provides stable prices in the grocery store and makes sure drought-stricken areas of our country, make sure our farmers are there to produce. this is a jobs bill, it's a bipartisan bill, it's a compromise, every major farm and nutrition group has asked for it to be done. all we need to do, bring it to the floor, and push one of the two buttons. yes for jobs in rural america and food for this country or no for more gridlock. i think we want the green button. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, elm from

houston, texas, wrote me this. my grandparents immigrated to the united states from the philippines in the 1960's. they spoke no english. had very little money and virtually no context yet they were able to create a legacy. they legally became american citizens, they built a strong life and worked hard. our family became successful through self-dedication, self-worth, self-drive and self-perseverance. similar to many immigrants before them. we did this without the help and having to rely on government handouts or legislative attempts to redistribute wealth through mass programs. in return our family gave back to this great country. since then we have had four generations of military service in the united states navy or the united states army. we worked hard, we beat adversity, we gave back and we served this country. mr. speaker, elm and elm's family worked hard for their american dream. this is an immigrant success story. in spite of and without the

help of big, oppressive government. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. sires: mr. speaker, hurricane sandy was an unprecedented storm that left a devastating impact on new jersey and the new york region, damaging homes, businesses and leaving millions without power. my district was hit tack -- particularly hard. numerous substations in our area were sub merged under water, leaving residents without electricity for nearly two weeks. as a result thousands of lehman have worked around the clock to assist those in need and help restore power. not only have those in new jersey and new york region joined together to help the impact by sandy, but hardness of individuals from across the country have come to lend a hand to the people of new jersey.

just the other day as i was touring damages around my district i saw license plates that raised from wisconsin to louisiana. i want to thank all the workers and volunteers whether they have come around the block or hundreds of miles away to assist a region in our recovery. while the road ahead to full recovery will be long, there is no doubt the progress would have been -- the progress we have made would not have been done without the assistance of all those people that came from around the country. i thank all those people that came to assist the people of new jersey. thank you very much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. . for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. . >> it is a privilege to be back here to work on some of most pressing issues facing the nation. the first time i ran for office was in the fifth grade as grade school vice president. back then i'm not sure what the most pressing issue was. maybe the option of getting

chocolate milk for lunch. today i serve for a very different reason. i want to preserve the greatness of the united states for my kids. mr. hultgren: including a very special fifth grader in my house. happy birthday, katie. i love you so much, i'm so proud of you and sorry i can't be with you today. i want you to know how proud i am of you and how your mom and i are so grateful to god that he gave you to us. happy birthday. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? without objection. the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. higgins: mr. speaker, left unresolved the uncertainty of the fiscal cliff with spending cuts and increased taxes will exact real and permanent damage on the american people and the american economy. what we need is leadership that was lacking that created the fiscal cliff in the first place. one that provides a balanced approach of spending cuts and

increased revenues. one that is bipartisan. and one that is aspirational. the history of our nation we only experience job growth when we invest in our own people and economy. in education, in scientific research, and roads and bridge building. to invest, to grow this economy, to grow jobs we have to produce the kind of strategic investments that are required. we need to get to work now to avoid this catastrophe and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? the gentleman seek unanimous consent? without objection, the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. clarke: mr. speaker, i agree that we must avoid the fiscal cliff, but let's come to an agreement to reduce the deficit in a way that will make this

country more competitive. let's reform the tax codes to boost manufacturing. let's close those loopholes that send jobs overseas and replace them with tax credits which will relocate jobs back to the u.s. let's reform our code to bring american jobs back home and create more jobs by promoting u.s. manufacturing. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? the gentleman seek unanimous consent? >> thank you mr. speaker. on october 29 hurricane sandy struck the northeastern portion of america, including the state of connecticut. mr. courtney: 90 miles per hour winds arrived at 9:00 that night, coinciding with high tide, flooding communities

everywhere. knocking out power, destroying property, leaving a wake of destruction in its path. first responders like george, the fire chief in new london, the fire marshal in madison, connecticut, and many others were up to the challenge to save lives, protect human life from one end to the other. mayors like paul where regional emergency shelter was put into operation worked to restore power. team work from volunteers and red cross, salvation army, came together and had one mission which was to save lives and restore the region. we need to follow that example here in congress as we face the challenges that confront this nation over the next seven weeks. thank you to all of those leaders who, again, had ale chaleng of a historic storm bigger than 1938 and follow their example to advance the interest of our nation. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the

gentleman from iowa seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from iowa is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise again to highlight an important issue to iowa and the nation, the tax credit. it expires in the month and must be extended immediately. inaction has already led to job losses in iowa and threatens thousands more jobs in our state -- state. the wind credit has bipartisan roots and. mr. loebsack: the senate already passed a bipartisan package that included the wind credit. it's past time for the house to act. iowa is the second largest producer of wind energy in the contry. wind manufacturing involves about 00 companies and 6,000 good paying jobs for iowans. congress should not play games with people's jobs and pull the rug out from an industry employing thousands in the middle of an economic downturn. the wind considered as read sit also critical for energy production and job creation.

congress must extend the wind credit now before more jobs are lost, especially at this time with unemployment and economic downturn we still continue to suffer from. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition? ms. kaptur: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent? ms. kaptur: i seek unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized without objection for one minute. ms. kaptur: thank you very much. thank you, mr. speaker. on this week of veterans day, i rise to pay tribute to two noble americans and great american organization, honor flight. earl from ohio and jeff miller of north carolina are two of the founding members of the honor flight network. the honor flight network philanthropy is dedicated to bringing world war ii veterans to their memorial here in washington, d.c., the national world war ii memorial. that memorial is now the most visited on our nation's mall

with over four million visitors a year. imagine if every world war ii veteran who wanted to come could. these brave men and women served our country during world war ii in the 20th century's most profound struggle of liberty over tyranny. their sacrifices with over 400,000 lost in those horrendous conflicts ensure that our generation and those to follow could enjoy our freedoms in the 20th century, the 21st, and beyond. earl morris started the honor flight network. he led the inaugural flights to the world war ii memorial starting in 2005. not long after the memorial opened. jeff miller began to serve those from rural areas. mr. speaker, let me just say that these two men's ennobling work have now allowed over 100,000 americans of the world war ii generations who fought to come and visit the memorial. let me thank you, mr. speaker, and thank those veterans and honor honor flight and these men

for what they are doing for our nation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. langevin: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. langevin: mr. speaker, november is national family caregiver awareness month, a time to honor the work of over 65 million family members who sacrifice every day to care for their loved ones with special needs. whether they have a father with alzheimer's or mother with parkinson's disease or a child with autism, these caregivers provide approximately 80% of the long-term care for the chronically ill. unfortunately, this 24-hour-a-day commitment can take a toll on the caregivers' emotional well-being. the rhett pit care provides a break for family members engaged in the full-time task of care giving. in fact, it is the most frequently requested support

service, yet nearly 90% of caregivers still go without needed assistance. that's why i have introduced the respite care re-authorization act and will continue to add vow date for its passage and funding. mr. speaker, family caregivers are our nation's silent heroes. and they deserve our recognition and support not just in november but every day of the year. and to all of them, i say heartfelt thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent? >> i do. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, all along the east coast, families are struggling to recover from superstorm sandy. that makes avoiding the fiscal cliff even more important. unless we come together in this body to reach across the aisle and compromise, the federal

emergency management agency, fema, which is helping thousands and thousands of people in small businesses recover from this disaster, could be cut as much as $848 million. cutting fema would be a man-made disaster that would cripple relief efforts in my home state of new york and in many other states. i don't believe that anyone in this conbye -- in this body campaigned on raising the unemployment rate or campaigned to see the u.s. economy fall back into a recession, which would happen if we wept over this fiscal cliff. i hope that no one -- went over this fiscal cliff. i hope no one here wants to place a significant new tax burden on the middle class. in these final days of congress, let's reach across the aisle, let's reach to one another and work together on a critical problem we need to solve. we need to avoid the fiscal live. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i just met with the fema director, craig fugate, and expressed general concerns, first about the need for temporary housing for those in my district. we talked about bringing in trailers and he discussed that and said this was something they were working on. we also talked about the need to have the army corps do emergency work on dunes and beach restoration that has been destroyed in this storm. he said he was going to follow up on that. we also asked about the state and local match. many of my towns are very small and they can't afford the 25% state and local match for long-term recovery work. we are trying to get that reduced or eliminated. finally, mr. speaker, many of my homeowners have been asked about if their homes can be bought out

or raised up on stilts and pilings. this is another thing we are following up on. i just wanted to say i felt that the fema director was very responsive to our concerns and we are going to follow up on these and other concerns as we continue to work on a humanitarian concerns and the individual towns in the sixth district and throughout the state of new jersey. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. recorded votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from nevada seek recognition? >> i move to suspend the rules and concur in senate amendment to h.r. 2606. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the tile of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 260 , an act to authorize the secretary of the interior to allow the

construction and operation of natural gas pipeline facilities in the gateway national recreation area, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from nevada, mr. amodei, and the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, will each control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from nevada. mr. amodei: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. amodei: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. amodei: h.r. 2606, introduced by congressman michael grimm, authorizes construction of a lateral pipeline off the coast of new york city. it will pass under the gateway national recreation area and deliver natural gas to residents of brooklyn and queens. under current law, the national park service does not have the authority to approve the pipeline. therefore, hongman grimm introduced h.r. 2606 to allow the project to move forward

benefiting not only new york residents but also visitors to gateway national recreation area. h.r. 2606 has bipartisan support and is supported by the national park service. the house approved its legislation in february. it has passed the senate with noncontroversial amendments. we are now acting to send this to the president. i urge adoption of h.r. 2606 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arizona virginia tech. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. grijalva: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: we have no objection to the senate amendment to h.r. 2606. as amnded. this bill allows for delivery of natural gas into an underserved area while also providing a revenue stream that will allow the national park service to rehabilitate important historic structures at gateway national recreation area.

of we support the enactment of h.r. 2606 as amended. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from nevada is recognized. mr. amodei: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield four minutes to the gentleman from the empire state, mr. grimm. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for four minutes. mr. grim: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to thank my colleague foreall -- for all his work on this as well. it's a great opportunity to speak on this bill, 2606, the new york city natural gas supply enhancement act, which would authorize the secretary of the interior to allow the construction and operation of a natural gas pipeline facility in new york portion of the gateway national recreational area. . i appreciate the support for the bill when it was first considered here in the house and now as it's considered with the senate modifications. further, i wish to extend my sincerest appreciation to a good friend and my colleague

from new york, mr. gregory meeks. from start to finish this bill has been a bipartisan effort and is an example of what we can -- what exactly we can accomplish when we work together toward a common goal. this project will be the first bulk natural gas transmission project in brooklyn, statin island and queens in more than 40 years. the 5.2 million people living in these three burroughs are demanding more and more natural gas. natural gas as we all know is reliable, it's clean, it's domestic and it's economical. on september 15 of last year, new york city deputy mayor testified before the national park subcommittee and in support -- and they're in support of the grimm-meeks bill. i appreciate all the courtesy shown to him on that day. in his testimony, the deputy stated, energy demand in new york city is increasing and will continue to grow. therefore getting the gateway

project done is a major effort that includes the private sector, the city, state and federal governments. the gateway pipeline project will generate approximately $265 million in construction activity. create almost 300 local jobs and bring in about $8 million in annual local revenue for the city of new york. providing much-needed short and long-term boost to our economy. following house passage, my colleague, congressman crowley, praised the bill for reducing the use of two so-called dirtier fuels, number four and number six oil. the senate modification of h.r. 2606 resolves concerns raised by the national park service about the house bill and now has full national park support as well as that of the partnership for new york city, the regional plan association, organized labor and mayor bloomberg. when i came to congress i

promised my constituents in staten island and brooklyn that i would find fiscally conservative ways to create jobs and get our country moving again. mr. speaker, this bill does just that. not only will it create a unique public-private partnership, but it also creates well-paying jobs. and it increases the supply of inexpensive natural gas and does it all at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer, even bringing revenue to the treasury. so, mr. speaker, i thank you again for the opportunity to speak in support of this bill. i urge my colleagues to support it and ask that my written statement be included in the record and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from nevada is recognized. mr. amodei: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back of bat -- i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nevada yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 2606. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair,

2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the senate amendment is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? garrett garrett thank you, mr. speaker. i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 6570. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 6570, a bill to amebled the american recovery and re-investment act of 2009, and the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008, to consolidate certain c.b.o. reporting requirements. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, and the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. maloney, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks

and add extraneous material as well. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. without objection. mr. garrett: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. garrett: mr. speaker, under the current law, the congressional budget office or the c.b.o., is statutorily required to submit semiannual and quarterly reports to congress pursuant to tarp and stimulus requirements. unfortunately these reports have become mainly repetitive in nature. they say the same thing over and over again. and do not provide a lot of new information to congress. in addition to these reports, consume a great deal of c.b.o. staff resources. so to remedy this we have h.r. 6570 before us. what this will do is to reduce the frequency of the reports required each year by the c.b.o. as well as required by the g.a.o. so first 6570 would change the

quarterly stimulus reporting requirements for the c.b.o. to annual report requirements due at the end of each calendar year. this legislation would also sunset the error reporting requirements of c.b.o. and g.a.o. on january 1 of 2016. h.r. 6570 would not impact the current reporting requirements for recipients of error, for funds or the reports required by the executive branch agencies, i'd like to point out. secondly, h.r. 6570 would change the tarp reporting requirements for c.b.o. and the o.m.b. to anual basis from a semiannual basis. so this legislation would also sunset reporting requirements for the c.b.o. and o.m.b. to when the last tarp assets have been sold or when they were last transferred out of the control of the federal government. so, mr. speaker, i think this is a commonsense bill to reduce government duplication and ensure that congressional support agencies such as the

c.b.o. and the g.a.o. are using their limited resources most effectively and with that i urge the support of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. maloney: i rise in support of h.r. 6570, which will amend the reporting requirements in two laws. the american recovery and reinvestment act, of 2009, also known as the stimulus package, and the emergency stabilization act of 2008, which created tarp, and i commend my colleague from the great state of new jersey for bringing this bill to the floor. in both laws the congressional budget office, the government accountability office, and the office of management and budget have certain reporting and comment requirements. the goal of the bill before us today is to streamline those

requirements and make them workable for all of the agencies and for the american public while preserving the access to the information. it will make these agencies more efficient this their oversight of both the stimulus and of the tarp programless. first, the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 requires recipients of grants made under the law to produce detailed quarterly reports on their use of the funds. these reports include the amount that was spent, the number of jobs that were created and certain information about the subcontractors. the reports are publicly available and the bill before us does not touch the reports themselves or the requirements that they are required to produce. however, c.b.o. and g.a.o. are also required under the law to comment each quarter on the con

tent of the report -- content of the report. this bill before us today simply says that they can provide those comments on an annual basis rather than quarterly. this will ease the burden on the c.b.o. and g.a.o. while maintaining their oversight of responsibility. second, in the law that created the tarp fund, o.m.b. was required to report on a semiannual basis the estimated cost of tarp. the assumptions behind that estimate, and estimate how the costs have changed. the bill before us today would amend the law to allow o.m.b. to submit these reports annually rather than semiannually. this again lessens the burden on o.m.b., especially four years after tarp was enacted and when a large majority of those funds have been paid back.

semiannual reports are simply no longer needed. finally, the bill before us includes a commonsense provision to sunset o.m.b.'s reporting requirement once all remaining troubled assets required under the tarp program are no longer owned or controlled by the federal goof. -- government. so i support this bill, i support this effort to lessen the burden on agencies that are already stretched extremely thin and are stretching every single dollar while ensuring that the public continues to have the valuable information the reports would provide, and information that these agencies are providing. i support the bill and reserve the balance of my time. and i have no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: if the gentlelady has no further speakers, i have no further speakers. i'll conclude by saying to the gentlelady, thank you very much for working with us on this bill. thank you for the support of

the legislation and with that, seeing no other speakers, i will yield back the balance of my time. mrs. maloney: i join my colleague in commending his work and relieving unnecessary burdens and requirements on important agencies. i support this bill, i have no further speakers and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the gentlelady from new york yields back. question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 6570. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and concur with -- in the senate amendment to h.r. 2543. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2453, an act to

require the secretary of the treasury to mint coins in commemoration of mark twain. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. luetkemeyer, and the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. maloney, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. luetkemeyer: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to add extraneous material to this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. luetkemeyer: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. luetkemeyer: mr. speaker, today i rise in support of the senate amendment to h.r. 2453rks the mark twain commemorative coin act. the underlying legislation which passed the house by a vote of 408-4 on april 18 and the senate by unanimous consent in september with will allow the u.s. mint, the treasury, to mint $1 and $5 commemorative coins in 2016. which will promote the important legacy of mark twain and benefit four institutions that bear his name. the mark twain house and museum

in hartford, kentucky. the university of california, berkley. almi, a college in new york and the mark twain boyhood home and museum in missouri. this bill will cost the american taxpayers nothing. in fact, the senate has included language that specifically ensures that the minting and issuing of coins in this act will not result in any net cost to the united states government and that no funds can be disbursed to the recipients until the total cost of designing and issuing all coins are first recovered by the u.s. treasury. i'd like to thank my colleague, mr. larson of kentucky, -- connecticut, for his leadership on this legislation. i'd also like to acknowledge mark twain's boyhood home and museum executive director. and the museum's curator, as well as their dedicated staff for their incrid credible work to promote awareness and appreciation of life and works of mark twain.

the bill we consider today honors the legacy of a great american and will greatly help to educate the public on his great accomplishments and contributions to society. i urge my colleagues to join me in passing this legislation and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. maloney: i yield myself as much time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. maloney: thank you. i rise in strong support of h.r. 2458, the mark twain commemorative coin act. this legislation will allow the u.s. treasury department to mint $1 silver and $5 gold commemorative coins in recognition of mark twain's incredible legacy. the minting of these coins will come at no additional cost to the taxpayer and will be divided among four important organizations dedicated to promoting the legacy of mark twain. one will be the mark twain house and museum in hartford, connecticut. secondly, the mark twain project at the vancroft library at the university of

california-berkley. thirdly, the center for mark twain studies at elmira credge in my home state of new york. and lastly, the mark twain boyhood home and museum in missouri. i commend the work of my colleague, representative luetkemeyer, this bill will ensure that these great institutions will benefit directly from mark twain's legacy. . samuel clemens, better known to the world as mark twain, was one of the most important and unique american voices whose literary work has had a lasting effect on our nation's history and culture. in fact, mark twain was instrumental in popularizing the image of an american full of hardworking men and women who pull themselves up from their own bootstraps, an america that is still very much alive and well and part of the american dream.

mark twain's literary achievements and educational legacy remains strong to this very day with nearly every book he wrote still in print, still taught in our schools, and still providing us with a social narrative that we will not and should not forget. the adventures of tom sawyer, huckleberry fin, the prince and the pauper, twain's writhing continued to be printed over a century after they were first published and they continue to take a lasting impact. they are a cherished memory for every american school child. as mark twain once wrote, and i quote, there is nothing that cannot happen today. isn't that the american spirit? the can-do american spirit. i support this legislation as the recognition of one of america's greatest authors and

certainly one of america's most popular authors, mark twain and i reserve the balance of my time. i thank my colleague for bringing forward this important legacy legislation. american legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. luetkemeyer: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to close by saying i have no further speakers to speak in support of the bill. invite my colleague from new york to come to the district and you can see the landmarks that inspired mark twain to write about "huckleberry finn" and "tom sawyer." you can see the type of people that were around to see how he came up with his ideas. it's a neat place to visit and i welcome you to come. with that, mr. speaker, i have no further folks to speak on the bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york yields back the balance of his time. mrs. maloney: i have no further

speakers. i would like to take up my good friend on the other side of the aisle on his off and see if we can get a group of congress members to come and see this lasting legacy. mark twain, i read every single one of his books. i'd love to see his inspiration from the great state of missouri. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york yields back the balance of her time. all time having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendments to h.r. 2453. so many as are in favor say aye. mrs. maloney: i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from suspend. those oppose ld say no. pp opinion, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative -- -- in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative -- the gentlelady from new york requests the yeas and nays. the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 6116 to amend the revised organic act of the virgin islands to provide for direct appeals to the united states supreme court of decisions as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 6116, a bill to amend the revised organic act of the virgin islands to provide for direct appeals to the united states supreme court of decisions of the virgin islands' supreme court. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. coble, and the gentleman

from virginia, mr. scott, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. coble: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 6116, as amended. currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. coble: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. coble: h.r. 6116 authorizes direct review by this united states supreme court of decisions rendered by the supreme court on the virgin islands. i thank representative christensen for her work on this bill. created in 2007, the supreme court of the u.s. virgin islands is the equivalent of the u.s. state supreme court. it is authorized to review all final orders, judgments and interlocutory orders of the virgin islands superior court.

appeals from the virgin islands supreme court are made by petitions to the u.s. courts of appeals from the third circuit. federal statute specifies that discretionary review by the third circuit exists for the first 15 years following inception of the virgin islands' supreme court. or until it has developed sufficient institutional traditions to justify direct review by the supreme court of the united states from all such final decisions which ever is sooner. the third circuit's dirble council, mr. speaker, evaluates the progress of the virgin islands' supreme court in five-year intergrals. following extensive review, the counsel published its initial fifth year report last april. the council recommends that the u.s. supreme court exercise direct review of all final decisions made by the virgin islands supreme court. h.r. 6116, adopts a third

circuit recommendation. the bill simply authorizes the u.s. supreme court to review at its discretion all final judgments rendered by the virgin islands supreme court. the suspicion version under consideration makes two technical changes to the bill as introduced. first, it clarifies that the u.s. supreme court may review final judgments of the virgin islands's supreme court pursuant to certain petitions. in other words, the u.s. supreme court may exercise its own discretion to accept or reject cases. secondly, the suspension version expands the u.s. supreme court appellate jurisdiction through an additional reference of chapter 81 of title 48 of the u.s. code. chapter 81 sets forth the jurisdiction and venue of the u.s. supreme court. judges, lawyers, and litigants

look when they have questions about the course of appellate jurisdiction. the creation of an additional reference to chapter 1, to chapter a-1 makes it easier to find the new law. i again thank -- express my thanks to mrs. christensen for her work on this bill and i urge my colleagues to supreme court h.r. 6116. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 6116 as amended. i supreme court the legislation for several reasons. to begin with, this bill simply implements the recommendation of the third circuit judicial council to allow decisions of the virgin islands supreme court to be reviewed directly by the united states supreme court. the virgin islands supreme court is the equivalent of a u.s. state supreme court who is authorized to review all final orders, judgments, and specified

interlocutory orders of the virgin islands superior court's. appeals from the virgin islands supreme court are made to the u.s. court of appeals in the third circuit at this time. this act specifically grants the third circuit appellate jurisdiction for the first 15 years of the virgin islands supreme court existence. in addition it requires the third circuit judicial counsel to submit reports to two congressional committees every five years assessing whether the virgin islands supreme court has developed sufficient institutional traditions to justify direct review by the supreme court of the united states from all of its final decisions. in april of this year the third circuit judicial council submitted the first of these reports and the council concluded that the virgin islands supreme court had met the standard necessary to justify direct review by its decisions by the united states supreme court. accordingly the council recommended congress enact

legislation to allow for such review. h.r. 6116 feck waits the third circuit's recommendations by deleting from the revised organic act both the provision granting appellate jurisdiction to the third circuit and the reporting requirement. also support changes reflected in the version of the bill we are considering today because they reflect input both from the supreme court and academic expert. specifically the amended version of the bill requires both the bill's long title and header to section 1 so that they refer to direct review rather than direct appeal. this change more accurately reflects the discretionary nature of the u.s. supreme court scores' appellate jurisdiction over most cases whereby its case force consideration for granting petitions or writs. additionings the amended version adds provisions to chapter 81 of title 28 of the united states code to further clarify the scope of the united states

supreme court's discretionary appellate jurisdiction with respect to decisions of the virgin islands supreme court. finally, h.r. 6116 is consistent with precedent for example in 2004 congress enacted similar legislation to provide for direct review by the u.s. supreme court of decisions of the guam supreme court. i congratulate the gentlelady from the virgin islands, dr. christensen, for her leadership in this measure. i also thank the judiciary committee chairman, the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, for his assistance in bringing this legislation to the floor. i urge my colleagues to supreme court the bill and i reserve the balance of my time. does gentleman have additional speakers? mr. coble: i have no additional speakers. and i reserve the balance of my time. mr. scott: i yield such time as she may consume to the gentlelady from the virgin islands, dr. christensen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from the virgin islands is recognized. mrs. christensen: thank you,

congressman scott. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 6116, legislation i sponsored to provide for direct appeals of decisions of the virgin islands supreme court, to the u.s. supreme court. i want to begin by thanking the chairman and ranking member of the committee on the judiciary and their staff for working together in a bipartisan way to simply report h.r. 6116 and bring it to the house floor today. on behalf of the people of the virgin islands i want to say thank you to chairman smith and ranking member conyers, as well as to my colleague, congressman coble and congressman scott who are managing the bills on the floor today. just five months ago i had the pleasure of joining the elected leaders of the virgin islands at a ceremony to celebrate the supreme court reaching a historic milestone. specifically, the occasion was to receive the report from the judicial council of the third circuit requiring the review of the virgin islands supreme court doing its first five years as required by law which authorized

the virgin islands to create a local appellate court. the third circuit report concluded that the u.s. virgin islands supreme court developed sufficient institutional traditions to justify direct review of its final decisions by the united states supreme court and urge congress toe enact legislation -- to enact legislation providing the supreme court of the u.s. virgin islands enjoys the same relationship of the u.s. supreme court as the highest court of any state. today the house will take the first step in making the virgin islands supreme court just like every other high court in the state and territories. this is just one more step on the journey for further local self-governance which was begun in 1984 when my predecessor, former delegate to congress, amended the virgin islands' 1954 organic tookt allow for the creation of an appellate court chartered under local law. while it took another 20 years for the virgin islands act number 6687 to be signed into

law by the then governor and two more years for chief justice and associate justices to be nominated and confirmed, and for the supreme court to formally accepted appellate jurisdiction. chief justice hodge and associate judges are to be commended for the work they did to earn the recommendation of the third circuit's judicial council for appeal of their decisions to go directly to the u.s. supreme court. in doing so they are following a sister territory of guam which was the last supreme court that gained direct appeals of their decisions to the u.s. supreme court. over these past five years, the virgin islands supreme court has issued opinions on such wide ranging cases as whether and when -- when a judge could be disciplined a firm in a landmark ruling women are not property. while nigh staff unofficial account under the many accomplishments is the issuance accomplishments is the issuance of over